Search Results

Search found 4786 results on 192 pages for 'traffic shaping'.

Page 56/192 | < Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >

• VPN Trunk Between Cisco ASA 5520 and DrayTek Vigor 2930

  - by David Heggie

  I'm a bit of a VPN newbie, so please go easy on me ... I'm trying to use the VPN trunking capabilities of the DrayTek Vigor 2930 firewall to bond two IPSec VPN connections to a Cisco ASA 5520 device and I'm getting myself tied in knots and hope someone here with more knowledge / experience can help. I have a remote site with two ADSL connections and the DrayTek box. The main office site has the Cisco ASA device. I am able to setup a single IPSec connection between the two sites on either of the ADSL connections' public IP addresses, but as soon as I try to use the VPN bonding, nothing works. The VPN tunnels are both still up, but the traffic is getting lost somewhere. I suspect it's due to the ASA not knowing how to route the traffic back over the VPN - one minute, traffic from my remote office's network is coming from public ip address #1, the next it's coming from public address #2 and it doesn't know what to do. Well, that's my newbie impression of what's going wrong, but I don't really know: If this is really what's happening If what I'm trying to do (bond two VPN connections from a single remote network to improve the bandwidth / resiliency) is possible with the kit I've got Could anyone help?

  Read the article

• Virtualization and best hardware sharing scenario for me

  - by azera

  Hello, Following this thread on super user, I now want to start installing all my vm on the hardware. As a remainder, i have a (powerful enough) server on which i want to install 3 OS: there is a debian (general dev testbed purposes), an ipcop (network control/firewall) and a freenas (local network file sharing). I'm wondering which scenario would be the best for me and if I will be able to share the hardware to do what i want; either a - install an hypervisor like the free vmware esx and all three vms in it, or b - install debian, and the other two running inside it with virtual box My need being that: the ipcop should handle all network traffic to the internet, meaning all traffic from my main computer but also all traffic from the other two vm the freenas shares should be accessible from the other two vm and my main computer too i don't really care about the debian access, i only need to access it from my main computer, not the other vms Will I need to install additionnal network cards for each vm or can they all share the same one happily ? (right now I have two, one linking the server to my router [which only ipcop is gonna use] and one linking it to my switch [which i would like all three to use]) As for harddrives, I was going to use 1 harddrive cut in 3 partitions to install all three OSes, then add to that the freenas drives, will it be correct ? Thanks a lot for anyone who can help me, this is kind of a vast area and I'm not sure which way to go at all

  Read the article

• Finding cause of TCP retransmission within a LAN

  - by Surreal

  Hello denizens of Server Fault I have an irritating problem with a LAN of about 100 computers, 2 Windows domain servers, and 12 VoIP phones. Since their installation around a year ago, every week or so, we notice a VoIP phone resetting itself - occasionally in the middle of a call. Simultaneously there are often signs of temporary loss of connection on computers: freezes in explorer while accessing network shares, errors in our administration software due to loss of connection to the database server. I have been doing some Wireshark monitoring on the connection between the VoIP PBX and the rest of the network. Wireshark picks up a clump of retransmitted TCP packets at the times when we record phone restarts. The Wireshark log shows about 2 clusters of retransmissions a day ranging from 5 packets to hundreds. Those in each cluster are mainly between the PBX and some set of the VoIP phones, but not always the same set. Often retransmissions at the same time are to phones connected to the same switch, but sometimes retransmissions occur together to phones at opposite ends of the network. There are usually some coincident retransmissions in passing TCP traffic, for example between client machines and the file servers. The spikes in retransmissions and phone resets do not correlate well with when the network is heavily loaded. They seem to occur slightly more during the day, but most in the evening, when traffic should be decreasing. They occur reasonably often late at night when most computers are turned off and traffic should be lowest. Do you have any ideas that might help diagnose the cause of problems like this? One thing I have not yet tried, but should have, is updating the firmware of all the switches.

  Read the article

• Windows 8 - no internet connetction to some hosts while VPN is active

  - by HTD

  I use VPN to access the servers at work. When VPN is used, all network traffic to the Internet passes through my company network. It worked without any problems on Windows 7, now on Windows 8 some sites suddenly became inaccessible. Please note - I don't try to connect them over RDP, they are public Internet addresses, outside company network. They are inaccessible using any protocol. Ping returns "General failure.". I know it could be a misconfiguration on my company's server side, but it's very strange, since the same VPN connection used on Windows 7 works properly. What's wrong? Is it a Windows 8 bug, or is there something I could do on my company servers to make VPN work as expected with Windows 8? My company network works on Windows Server 2008 R2 and uses Microsoft TMG firewall. I couldn't find any rules blocking the traffic to mentioned sites, all network traffic for VPN users are passed through for all IPs and protocols. Any clues? UDPATE: Important - one whole day it worked. I hibernated and restarted the computer, connected and disconnected VPN - nothing could break my connection. Today it broke again, and restarting Windows didn't help. And now the solution: route add -p 0.0.0.0 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.1.1 Oh, OK, I know what it did, added my default gateway to routing table. But it still didn't work sometimes. So I removed my main network gateway route with: route delete -p 0.0.0.0 MASK 0.0.0.0 192.168.0.1 And added modified with: route add -p 0.0.0.0 MASK 255.255.255.255 192.168.0.1 And it works. Now. But I don't trust this. I don't know what really happened.

  Read the article

• What would cause an IIS6 website to be unavailable remotely randomly for a few minutes at a time?

  - by jskunkle

  Website is served by iis6 on windows server 2003. Never saw this problem once for months in beta. We made the new site live yesterday - its getting more traffic than in beta but not that much - resource utilization on the server and speed are fine. Today the site has been unavailable remotely a few (4?) times for a few minutes at a time. If you visit any page on the site - nothing is ever returned and eventually the request times out. While this is happening - I can connect to the server via remote desktop and the site loads fine from the live url when running a browser on the server locally. Other websites on the server continiue to function fine the entire time (using the same instance of iis, different app pools). Other computers on the same network can't access the website either. Other than not serving content - the server seems to behave normally - scheduled jobs in our custom job system continue to run, etc. We've looked at the iis logs quickly and we don't see any traffic out of the ordinary - no traffic spikes, etc. Any ideas? Thanks, Shane

  Read the article

• how to design pound -> varnish -> jboss for ha + loadbalancing

  - by andreash

  Hello, I'm planning a new infrastructure for our web application. We have two JBossAS5 servers, running in a cluster. Session state will be replicated via JBoss Cache. In front of that, there should be some cache, to speed up delivery of static elements. However, most of the traffic to our app will be via HTTPS. So far, I had been thinking of two Varnish caches in front of the JBossASs, each being configured for loadbalancing to the two JBossASs via round-robin. Since Varnish doesn't handle HTTPS, then there would need to be two pound proxies in front of the Varnishs, dealing with the HTTPS. The two pounds would be made high-available with Heartbeat/LinuxHA. The traffic to www.example.com would then be going through our firewall, from there to the virtual IP of the pounds, from there to the Varnishs, and from there to the JBossASs. Question 1: Does this make sense? Or is it overly complicated, and the same goal can be reached with simpler methods? Question 2: If my layout is fine, how do I configure the pound - Varnish step? Should I a) make the Varnish service high-available through Heartbeat/LinuxHA as well and direct traffic from pound to the virtual IP of the Varnishs, or should I rather b) Configure two independent Varnishs and use load-balancing in pound to address the different Varnishs? Thanks a lot for your insight! Andreas.

  Read the article

• Balancing internal services using a Cisco CSS 11501

  - by Ladadadada

  First, the background to the problem: I have a Cisco CSS11501 that I am using to load balance a few web servers. These web servers have two network interfaces, one internal and one external and we are sending the requests to the internal interface. We have the CSS configured to do NAT because our webservers need to see the client's IP address. Because the TCP packets hit the webservers with a source address on the Internet, the webserver tries to send the packet back to the client over the external interface and not through the load balancer. In order to stop these requests being sent back out to the Internet via the external interface, we added a routing rule on these boxes so that all traffic with a source address on the internet will use the load balancer as the gateway. This part works fine. What I would also like to to is use the CSS as a load balancer for internal services such as our MySQL slaves. When I do this, I run into a similar problem; the TCP connection goes from the web server to the load balancer and then from the load balancer to the MySQL slave but the CSS spoofs a source address of the original webserver. The MySQL slave then tries to send the response directly to the webserver via the internal network and not via the load balancer. The ideal solution would be to tell the CSS not to do source address spoofing on the internal network and only do it for requests originating on the Internet. Is this possible ? Failing that, is there a way of directing the load balanced traffic back through the load balancer while keeping the other traffic (say SSH) purely on the internal network ? Is there another way of using the CSS11501 to load balance internal services ?

  Read the article

• GRE Tunnel over IPsec with Loopback

  - by Alek

  Hello, I'm having a really hard time trying to estabilish a VPN connection using a GRE over IPsec tunnel. The problem is that it involves some sort of "loopback" connection which I don't understand -- let alone be able to configure --, and the only help I could find is related to configuring Cisco routers. My network is composed of a router and a single host running Debian Linux. My task is to create a GRE tunnel over an IPsec infrastructure, which is particularly intended to route multicast traffic between my network, which I am allowed to configure, and a remote network, for which I only bear a form containing some setup information (IP addresses and phase information for IPsec). For now it suffices to estabilish a communication between this single host and the remote network, but in the future it will be desirable for the traffic to be routed to other machines on my network. As I said this GRE tunnel involves a "loopback" connection which I have no idea of how to configure. From my previous understanding, a loopback connection is simply a local pseudo-device used mostly for testing purposes, but in this context it might be something more specific that I do not have the knowledge of. I have managed to properly estabilish the IPsec communication using racoon and ipsec-tools, and I believe I'm familiar with the creation of tunnels and addition of addresses to interfaces using ip, so the focus is on the GRE step. The worst part is that the remote peers do not respond to ping requests and the debugging of the general setup is very difficult due to the encrypted nature of the traffic. There are two pairs of IP addresses involved: one pair for the GRE tunnel peer-to-peer connection and one pair for the "loopback" part. There is also an IP range involved, which is supposed to be the final IP addresses for the hosts inside the VPN. My question is: how (or if) can this setup be done? Do I need some special software or another daemon, or does the Linux kernel handle every aspect of the GRE/IPsec tunneling? Please inform me if any extra information could be useful. Any help is greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Firewall for internal networks

  - by Cylindric

  I have a virtualised infrastructure here, with separated networks (some physically, some just by VLAN) for iSCSI traffic, VMware management traffic, production traffic, etc. The recommendations are of course to not allow access from the LAN to the iSCSI network for example, for obvious security and performance reasons, and same between DMZ/LAN, etc. The problem I have is that in reality, some services do need access across the networks from time to time: System monitoring server needs to see the ESX hosts and the SAN for SNMP VSphere guest console access needs direct access to the ESX host the VM is running on VMware Converter wants access to the ESX host the VM will be created on The SAN email notification system wants access to our mail server Rather than wildly opening up the entire network, I'd like to place a firewall spanning these networks, so I can allow just the access required For example: SAN SMTP Server for email Management SAN for monitoring via SNMP Management ESX for monitoring via SNMP Target Server ESX for VMConverter Can someone recommend a free firewall that will allow this kind of thing without too much low-level tinkering of config files? I've used products such as IPcop before, and it seems to be possible to achieve this using that product if I re-purpose their ideas of "WAN", "WLAN" (the red/green/orange/blue interfaces), but was wondering if there were any other accepted products for this sort of thing. Thanks.

  Read the article

• How can I write automated tests for iptables?

  - by Phil Frost

  I am configuring a Linux router with iptables. I want to write acceptance tests for the configuration that assert things like: traffic from some guy on the internet is not forwarded, and TCP to port 80 on the webserver in the DMZ from hosts on the corporate LAN is forwarded. An ancient FAQ alludes to a iptables -C option which allows one to ask something like, "given a packet from X, to Y, on port Z, would it be accepted or dropped?" Although the FAQ suggests it works like this, for iptables (but maybe not ipchains as it uses in the examples) the -C option seems to not simulate a test packet running through all the rules, but rather checks for the existence for an exactly matching rule. This has little value as a test. I want to assert that the rules have the desired effect, not just that they exist. I've considered creating yet more test VMs and a virtual network, then probing with tools like nmap for effects. However, I'm avoiding this solution due to the complexity of creating all those additional virtual machines, which is really quite a heavy way to generate some test traffic. It would also be nice to have an automated testing methodology which can also work on a real server in production. How else might I solve this problem? Is there some mechanism I might use to generate or simulate arbitrary traffic, then know if it was (or would be) dropped or accepted by iptables?

  Read the article

• Ruckus wireless AP and Dell PowerConnect configuration problems

  - by DanielJay

  We are working on trying to get some Ruckus Access Points to work correctly on our network. Currently our network is as follows: VLAN 10 - Servers VLAN 11 – Computers/DHCP VLAN 12 – Voice VLAN 13 – Guest We use Dell PowerConnect 6248P switches for our switches. Port settings are as follows: ZoneDirector 1100 is plugged into this port. Should be accessing the server VLAN and then allowing all other traffic. interface ethernet 1/g2 classofservice trust ip-dscp description 'Ruckus ZoneDirector 1100' switchport mode general switchport general pvid 10 switchport general allowed vlan add 10 switchport general allowed vlan add 11-13 tagged exit Access point is plugged into this port. The port has to be on VLAN 11 in order to get DHCP. interface ethernet 1/g16 classofservice trust ip-dscp description 'Ruckus - IT' switchport mode general switchport general pvid 11 switchport general allowed vlan add 10-12 switchport general allowed vlan add 13 tagged exit If we tag the traffic from the SSID as VLAN 11 data fails. If we leave the SSID tagged as 1 the data flows correctly. Are there problems with passing tagged traffic to untagged ports? We are looking to see what we can do to get the SSID tagged as 11 instead of 1. Any suggestions?

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Postfix email account with forward

  - by Mika

  I have an Ubuntu 12.04 server with Postfix installed. In Postfix installation I used this guide https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Postfix. I didn't go through all of that, just the sudo dpkg-reconfigure postfix part. I have created user accounts to my server and the users home directories contain a .forward file which have only one row the email address to forward to. I have defined dns A records for the names www.mydomain.com and mydomain.com But if I send an email to [email protected] it doesn't get forwarded. Actually I can't see any sign about any email ever visiting my server. My firewall is defined to allow incoming traffic for ports 80, 443 and 22. For outgoing traffic it allows ports 587 and 22. The exact definitions are below. Should I allow also outgoing http (port 80)? or maybe port 25? # Allow ssh in iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 22 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow incoming HTTP iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 80 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 80 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow incoming HTTPS iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --dport 443 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --sport 443 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing SSH iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 22 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 22 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT # Allow outgoing emails iptables -A OUTPUT -o eth0 -p tcp --dport 587 -m state --state NEW,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT iptables -A INPUT -i eth0 -p tcp --sport 587 -m state --state ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT Edits: I found lines from my syslog telling me that there were incoming traffic for port 25 which was blocked. The sender ip's for those packages were trustworthy, so I opened also port 25. Now I can see some Postfix logging in my syslog. It looks like it is at least trying to forward emails. I haven't yet received any forwarder emails into my gmail mail box.

  Read the article

• Testing realistic loads for new versions of existing web app

  - by David Cournapeau

  Assuming I have a relatively complex web application, I am interested in testing performances of a new version using a traffic as realistic as possible. Traffic is relatively complex (session-based, lots of internal logic which depends on incoming requests). The webapp depends on many servers (databases, frontends, etc...). I can think of two basic directions: Recording every incoming request with its timestamp in production in a centralized manner and replaying it from N clients to reproduce a load as close as possible as the original. Issue: because we have many servers, getting the centralized log is not trivial. having a system duplicating requests to a staging area so that I could "plug" a dev version of my webapp to it at anytime without affecting the production. Issue: I have not found much information about it expect this, which suggests to me that may not be the best solution. OTOH, it is realistic by definition. What is the standard way of doing this kind of testing ? I did not find much information about load testing with complex, realistic traffic.

  Read the article

• Virtual Machine Network Architecture, Isolating Public and Private Networks

  - by Mark

  I'm looking for some insight into best practices for network traffic isolation within a virtual environment, specifically under VMWARE ESXi. Currently I have (in testing) 1 hardware server running ESXi but i expect to expand this to multiple pieces of hardware. The current setup is as follows: 1 pfsense VM, this VM accepts all outside (WAN/internet) traffic and performs firewall/port forwarding/NAT functionality. I have multiple public IP addresses sent to the this VM that are used for access to individual servers (via per incoming IP port forwarding rules). This VM is attached to the private (virtual) network that all other VMs are on. It also manages a VPN link into the private network with some access restrictions. This isn't the perimeter firewall but rather the firewall for this virtual pool only. I have 3 VMs that communicate with each other, as well as have some public access requirements: 1 LAMP server running an eCommerce site, public internet accessible 1 accounting server, access via windows server 2008 RDS services for remote access by users 1 inventory/warehouse management server, VPN to client terminals in warehouses These servers constantly talk with each other for data synchronization. Currently all the servers are on the same subnet/virtual network and connected to the internet through the pfsense VM. The pfsense firewall uses port forwarding and NAT to allow outside access to the servers for services and for server access to the internet. My main question is this: Is there a security benefit to adding a second virtual network adapter to each server and controlling traffic such that all server to server communication is on one separate virtual network, while any access to the outside world is routed through the other network adapter, through the firewall, and on the the internet. This is the type of architecture i would use if these were all physical servers, but i'm unsure if the networks being virtual changes the way i should approach locking down this system. Thank you for any thoughts or direction to any appropriate literature.

  Read the article

• Configure tomcat behind loadbalancer to respond on HTTP and HTTPS

  - by user253530

  I have 2 tomcat machines behind a load balancer on Amazon EC2. Until now The load balancer was configured to respond only on https. So in order to access our services you would go to https://url. Tomcat was configured to listen on 8080 but the connector had additional params that would tell tomcat that it is behind a proxy and that it should respond on HTTPS 443. The connector looks like this: <Connector scheme="https" secure="true" proxyPort="443" proxyHost="my.domain.name" port="8080" protocol="HTTP/1.1" connectionTimeout="20000" redirectPort="8443" useBodyEncodingForURI="true" URIEncoding="UTF-8" /> What i would like to do is to open port 80 on the load balancer and basically allow traffic on HTTP and HTTPS. I've configured the load balancer to redirect all HTTP traffic to the tomcat machines on port 8088. I was thinking that i could define a new connector so that all HTTPS traffic goes to 8080 and HTTP to 8088. Unfortunately i did not succeed. Here is my connector <Connector port="8088" protocol="HTTP/1.1" connectionTimeout="20000" redirectPort="8443" useBodyEncodingForURI="true" URIEncoding="UTF-8" /> Am I missing something? Thanks

  Read the article

• High load average due to high system cpu load (%sys)

  - by Nick

  We have server with high traffic website. Recently we moved from 2 x 4 core server (8 cores in /proc/cpuinfo), 32 GB RAM, running CentOS 5.x, to 2 x 4 core server (16 cores in /proc/cpuinfo), 32 GB RAM, running CentOS 6.3 Server running nginx as a proxy, mysql server and sphinx-search. Traffic is high, but mysql and sphinx-search databases are relatively small, and usually everything works blazing fast. Today server experienced load average of 100++. Looking at top and sar, we noticed that (%sys) is very high - 50 to 70%. Disk utilization was less 1%. We tried to reboot, but problem existed after the reboot. At any moment server had at least 3-4 GB free RAM. Only message shown by dmesg was "possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies.". Here is snippet of sar 11:00:01 CPU %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 11:10:01 all 21.60 0.00 66.38 0.03 0.00 11.99 We know that this is traffic issue, but we do not know how to proceed future and where to check for solution. Is there a way we can find where exactly those "66.38%" are used. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• pfSense Load Balancer and Virtual IP

  - by jshin47

  I have two identical web servers on 10.2.1.13 and 10.2.1.113. I would like to set up pfSense load balancer to balance requests to both of these. I set up pools that included HTTP and HTTPS for both of these hosts, then set up virtual servers that responded on HTTP and HTTPS and referred traffic to its respective pool. However, I set up the virtual server to listen on 10.2.1.213, a LAN IP rather than a WAN IP, because I want LAN traffic to be able use the load balancer virtual server as well. So, I set up a Virtual IP for 10.2.1.213 on LAN IP, and a NAT port forwarding rule for HTTP and HTTPS traffic on a WAN IP to forward to 10.2.1.213. It seems like this should work, but it fails. What eventually happens is that when I try to access the page from WAN, I am directed to the login page for my pfSense device rather than the page I am expecting. When I try to access 10.2.1.213 from LAN, the request times out. What is going wrong here? I have tried it with and without NAT reflection to no avail. Please advise

  Read the article

• Vyatta internet connection + hosted site on same IP

  - by boburob

  Having a small issue setting up a vyatta. The company internet and two different websites are both on the same IP. Server 1 - Has websites hosted on ports 1000 and 3000 and also has a proxy server installed to provide internet connection to the domain Server 2 - Has a website hosted on ports 80 and 433 The vyatta is correctly natting the appropriate traffic to each server, and allowing the proxy to get internet traffic, however I have a problem getting to the websites hosted on these two servers inside the domain. I believe the problem is that the HTTP request is being sent with an IP, eg: 12.34.56.78. The request will reach the website and the server will attempt to send the request back to the IP, however this is the IP of the Vyatta, so it has nowhere else to go. I thought the solution would be something like this: rule 50 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 1000 } inbound-interface eth1 inside-address { address 10.19.2.3 } protocol tcp type destination } But this doesnt seem to do it! UPDATE I changed the rules to the following: rule 50 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 443 } outbound-interface eth1 protocol tcp source { address 10.19.2.3 } type masquerade } rule 51 { destination { address 12.34.56.78 port 443 } inbound-interface eth1 inside-address { address 10.19.2.2 } protocol tcp type destination } I am now seeing traffic going between the two with Wireshark, but the website will still fail to load.

  Read the article

• Problem routing between directly connected Subnets w/ ASA-5510

  - by Zephyr Pellerin

  This is an issue I've been struggling with for quite some time, with a seemingly simple answer (Aren't all IT problems?). And that is the problem of passing traffic between two directly connected subnets with an ASA While I'm aware that best practice is to have Internet - Firewall - Router, in many cases this isn't possible. For example, In have an ASA with two interfaces, named OutsideNetwork (10.19.200.3/24) and InternalNetwork (10.19.4.254/24). You'd expect Outside to be able to get to, say, 10.19.4.1, or at LEAST 10.19.4.254, but pinging the interface gives only bad news. Result of the command: "ping OutsideNetwork 10.19.4.254" Type escape sequence to abort. Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.19.4.254, timeout is 2 seconds: ????? Success rate is 0 percent (0/5) Naturally, you'd assume that you could add a static route, to no avail. [ERROR] route Outsidenetwork 10.19.4.0 255.255.255.0 10.19.4.254 1 Cannot add route, connected route exists At this point, you might gander if its a NAT or Access list problem. access-list Outsidenetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any access-list Internalnetwork_access_in extended permit ip any any There is no dynamic nat (or static nat for that matter), and Unnatted traffic is permitted. When I try pinging the above address (10.19.4.254 from Outsidenetwork), I get this error message from level 0 logging (debugging). Routing failed to locate next hop for icmp from NP Identity Ifc:10.19.200.3/0 to Outsidenetwork:10.19.4.1/0 This led me to set same-security traffic permit, and assigned the same, lesser and greater security numbers between the two interfaces. Am I overlooking something obvious? Is there a command to set static routes that are classified higher than connected routes?

  Read the article

• What is the recommended glusterFS configuration for a growing website?

  - by montana

  Hello, I have a website that is tracking towards 50 million hits per day average, and within the next 3 months should be over 100 million hits per day. We are trying to use GlusterFS v 3.0.0 (with latest patches as of 1-17-2010) Currently, we've just upgraded to a load balancer environment that has 3 physical hosts with 6 Xen-Server 5.5u1 VM's (2 on each host) to serve webpage traffic. Each machine has 6 Raid-6 local storage drives (7200RPM-SATA). The old machine we came from had 1 mirrored SAS 10k drive. We also set up glusterFS currently with 3 bricks, one on each host, and it is serving the 6 VM's as clients. In testing, everything seemed fine. However when we went to production, it seemed that there just wasn't enough I/O's available to serve traffic even upwards of 15mil hits. Weeks prior, our old server was able to handle traffic, maxed out, at 20mil. Is there any recommended configurations for such an application, or things to be aware of that isn't apparent with their documentation at gluster.org for a site our size?

  Read the article

• FreeBSD's ng_nat stopping pass the packets periodically

  - by Korjavin Ivan

  I have FreeBSD router: #uname 9.1-STABLE FreeBSD 9.1-STABLE #0: Fri Jan 18 16:20:47 YEKT 2013 It's a powerful computer with a lot of memory #top -S last pid: 45076; load averages: 1.54, 1.46, 1.29 up 0+21:13:28 19:23:46 84 processes: 2 running, 81 sleeping, 1 waiting CPU: 3.1% user, 0.0% nice, 32.1% system, 5.3% interrupt, 59.5% idle Mem: 390M Active, 1441M Inact, 785M Wired, 799M Buf, 5008M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 8192M Free PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND 11 root 4 155 ki31 0K 64K RUN 3 71.4H 254.83% idle 13 root 4 -16 - 0K 64K sleep 0 101:52 103.03% ng_queue 0 root 14 -92 0 0K 224K - 2 229:44 16.55% kernel 12 root 17 -84 - 0K 272K WAIT 0 213:32 15.67% intr 40228 root 1 22 0 51060K 25084K select 0 20:27 1.66% snmpd 15052 root 1 52 0 104M 22204K select 2 4:36 0.98% mpd5 19 root 1 16 - 0K 16K syncer 1 0:48 0.20% syncer Its tasks are: NAT via ng_nat and PPPoE server via mpd5. Traffic through - about 300Mbit/s, about 40kpps at peak. Pppoe sessions created - 350 max. ng_nat is configured by by the script: /usr/sbin/ngctl -f- <<-EOF mkpeer ipfw: nat %s out name ipfw:%s %s connect ipfw: %s: %s in msg %s: setaliasaddr 1.1.%s There are 20 such ng_nat nodes, with about 150 clients. Sometimes, the traffic via nat stops. When this happens vmstat reports a lot of FAIL counts vmstat -z | grep -i netgraph ITEM SIZE LIMIT USED FREE REQ FAIL SLEEP NetGraph items: 72, 10266, 1, 376,39178965, 0, 0 NetGraph data items: 72, 10266, 9, 10257,2327948820,2131611,4033 I was tried increase net.graph.maxdata=10240 net.graph.maxalloc=10240 but this doesn't work. It's a new problem (1-2 week). The configuration had been working well for about 5 months and no configuration changes were made leading up to the problems starting. In the last few weeks we have slightly increased traffic (from 270 to 300 mbits) and little more pppoe sessions (300-350). Help me please, how to find and solve my problem?

  Read the article

• Network Load Balancing and AnyCast Routing

  - by user126917

  Hi All can anyone advise on problems with the following? I am planning on installing the following setup on my estate: I have 2 sites that both have a large amount of users. Goals are to keep things simple for the users and to have automatic failover above the database level. Our Database will exist at the primary site and be async mirrored to the secondary site with manual failover procedures.The database generate sequential ID's so distributing it is not an option. I plan to site IIS boxes at both sites with all of the business logic on them and heavy operations. The connections to SQL will be lightweight and DB reads will be cached on IIS. On this layer I plan to use Windows network load balancing and have the same IP or IPs across all IIS boxes at both sites. This way there will be automatic failover and no single point of failure. Also users can have one web address regardless of which site they are in automatically be network load balanced to their local IIS. This is great but obviously our two sites are on different subnets and as this will be one IP address with most of our traffic we can't go broadcasting everything across the link between the sites. To solve this problem we plan to use AnyCast routing over our network layer to route the traffic to the most local box that is listening which will be defined by the network load balancing. Has anyone used this setup before? Can anyone think of any issues with this? Also some specifics I can't find anywhere at the moment. If my Windows box is assigned an IP and listening on that IP but network load balancing is not accepting specific traffic then will AnyCast route away from that? Also can I AnyCast on a socket level?

  Read the article

• Cisco 3560+ipservices -- IGMP snooping issue with TTL=1

  - by Jander

  I've got a C3560 with Enhanced (IPSERVICES) image, routing multicast between its VLANs with no external multicast router. It's serving a test environment where developers may generate multicast traffic on arbitrary addresses. Everything is working fine except when someone sends out multicast traffic with TTL=1, in which case the multicast packet suppression fails and the traffic is broadcast to all members of the VLAN. It looks to me like because the TTL is 1, the multicast routing subsystem doesn't see the packets, so it doesn't create a mroute table entry. If I send out packets with TTL=2 briefly, then switch to TTL=1 packets, they are filtered correctly until the mroute entry expires. My question: is there some trick to getting the switch to filter the TTL=1 packets, or am I out of luck? Below are the relevant parts of the config, with a representative VLAN interface. I can provide more info as needed. #show run ... ip routing ip multicast-routing distributed no ip igmp snooping report-suppression ! interface Vlan44 ip address 172.23.44.1 255.255.255.0 no ip proxy-arp ip pim passive ... #show ip igmp snooping vlan 44 Global IGMP Snooping configuration: ------------------------------------------- IGMP snooping : Enabled IGMPv3 snooping (minimal) : Enabled Report suppression : Disabled TCN solicit query : Disabled TCN flood query count : 2 Robustness variable : 2 Last member query count : 2 Last member query interval : 1000 Vlan 44: -------- IGMP snooping : Enabled IGMPv2 immediate leave : Disabled Multicast router learning mode : pim-dvmrp CGMP interoperability mode : IGMP_ONLY Robustness variable : 2 Last member query count : 2 Last member query interval : 1000

  Read the article

• Amazon EC2 Nat Instance - goes out but not back in

  - by nocode

  I've followed Amazon's steps and list what I've done. I've created 6 subnets (4 private SN1: 10.50.1.0/24, SN2: 10.50.2.0/24, SN3: 10.50.3.0/24, SN4: 10.50.4.0/24) and 2 public (SN5: 10.50.101.0/24 and SN6: 10.50.102.0/24) -I have a Bastion host and a NAT instance on SN5 and assigned EIP's to both. I created a test instance on SN1. edit: -NAT instance has source/destination check disabled -On the NAT instance, I had enabled the following commands to be bootstrapped: echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -s 10.0.0.0/16 -j MASQUERADE -In my VPC, the private subnets have their own route table and configured 0.0.0.0/0 to the NAT instance with 4 subnets being associated with the route table. I have a second route table for my public subnets and 0.0.0.0/16 is pointed towards the IGW (with the other 2 subnets associated with it). -For Security Groups, I have the NAT instance accepting all traffic on each of the 4 subnets and all OUTBOUND traffic is allowed. For my test server, I have allowed all outbound access and have allowed all traffic from the public subnet of the NAT host. I can ping internally with no issues. On my test instance, if I try to ping google.com, DNS resolves however I don't get a reply back. On my NAT instance, I run a tcpdump and can see the request being requested to google.com but it's not sending the reply back. My NAT host can ping and receive a reply from google. From the test host, when I ping the NAT instance, the tcpdump shows a request and receive. Is there something I'm missing? EDIT: I've figured it out - I had to save the iptable config and restart the service.

  Read the article

• Time-Machine backup over SSH tunnel to NFS mount

  - by BTZ

  I've recently started using a new NAS which runs CentOS 6.2. One of the purposes of the NAS would be to serve as a backup target. Whilst I have been using Apple's Time-Machine for a while and I am very satisfied with it, I'd like to continue using it. Backing up directly to an address in my network is no hassle; all works fine. For security reasons I'd like all my traffic to go through an ssh tunnel to the NAS. This way I can avoid needing to get a VPNserver (for personal reasons). As of NFSv4 the NFS deamon is bound to port 2049, which makes it easy for me to direct all traffic through a ssh tunnel. Tunnel: ssh -f admin@ms -L 2000:localhost:2049 -N Mount: mount -t nfs -o nfsvers=4,rw,proto=tcp,sync,intr,hard,timeo=600,retrans=10,wsize=32768,rsize=32768,port=2000 localhost:/mac_backup /Volumes/backup This works fine for Finder/terminal and throughput is almost equal to direct traffic. (CPU of the NAS does ride high when I reach max bandwidth though) Now the problem: With Time-Machine I can't use the NFS mount point mounted on localhost. TM seems to try to connect to it and then give me a "OSStatus error 65". I also tried using NFSv3 (I correctly forwarded all ports) with no luck. Can anyone shed a light on this and/or give a solution?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63  | Next Page >